Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT

30 ITR 181Supreme Court of India1956#185 most cited

What is Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT authority for?

If the Assessing Officer or appellate authority does not rebut the facts stated in an affidavit, those facts are binding on the tax authorities.

396

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT · 30 ITR 181 · affidavit not rebutted · binding on AO · facts in affidavit · tax authorities bound by affidavit · statement in affidavit

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132Section 132(4)Section 69ASection 147Section 69Section 153C

Issues it is cited on

section 158bb(1)retraction of statementsection 158bbsection 131(1a)section 292cstatement under section 132(4)section 132(4a)panchnamasection 153c(1)loose paperssection 132(4)dumb documents

Judgments citing Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT

ACIT, Nungambakkam vs. Integrated Service Point Limited, Anna Nagar

ITA 1876/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon'Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23 Integrated Service Point Ltd., (Formerly Integrated Service Point Vs. Pvt. Ltd.,) The Dy./Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. 6C, 6Th Floor, Gaiety Palace I/L, Blackers Road, Anna Road H.O., Chennai - 600 002. Pan: Aaaci 9527P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23 The Dy./Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. Integrated Service Point Ltd., (Formerly Integrated Service Point Vs. Pvt. Ltd.,) 6C, 6Th Floor, Gaiety Palace I/L, Blackers Road, Anna Road H.O., Chennai - 600 002. Pan: Aaaci 9527P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. Y. Sridhar, Fca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr. Bipin C.N, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.10.2025 घोषण की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2025 :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 134(4)Section 250

…e Department neither confronted the deponent by cross-examination to challenge the retraction nor produced any evidence to establish that the retraction lacked basis, contrary to the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s. Mehta Parikh (1956) 30 ITR 181. 91. While a deposition under Section 132(4) is an important piece of evidence, its evidentiary value is limited to the extent it is corroborated by other material. In the present case, the LD.CIT(A) correctly appreciated that the affidavit filed by Shri Stanley Babu was merely a reiteration of the letter dated 22.03.2023 and therefore could not b…

ACIT, Nunagambakkam vs. Integrated Service Point Limited, Anna Nagar

ITA 1874/CHNY/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon'Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23 Integrated Service Point Ltd., (Formerly Integrated Service Point Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd.,) The Dy./Asst. Commissioner Of Central Circle-2(4), 6C, 6Th Floor, Gaiety Palace I/L, Blackers Road, Anna Road H.O., Chennai - 600 002. Pan: Aaaci 9527P Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23 The Dy./Asst. Commissioner Of Integrated Service Point Ltd., Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. (Formerly Integrated Service Point Vs. Pvt. Ltd.,) 6C, 6Th Floor, Gaiety Palace I/L, Blackers Road, Anna Road H.O., Chennai - 600 002. Pan: Aaaci 9527P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. Y. Sridhar, Fca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By Mr. Bipin C.N, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement 13.10.2025 30.12.2025 - : 2 -:

For Appellant: Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCA
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 134(4)Section 250

…e Department neither confronted the deponent by cross-examination to challenge the retraction nor produced any evidence to establish that the retraction lacked basis, contrary to the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s. Mehta Parikh (1956) 30 ITR 181. 91. While a deposition under Section 132(4) is an important piece of evidence, its evidentiary value is limited to the extent it is corroborated by other material. In the present case, the LD.CIT(A) correctly appreciated that the affidavit filed by Shri Stanley Babu was merely a reiteration of the letter dated 22.03.2023 and therefore could not b…

Salek Chand Saini, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Meerut

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 2545/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2545/DEL/2024 [A.Y 2014-15] Shri Salek Chand Saini Vs. The I.T.O. H. No. 198, Mohalla Raza Darwaza Ward - 2(3) Meerut Road, Parikshitgarh, Meerut Meerut PAN: PCECPS 3545 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Aggarwal, CA Department By : Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 04.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 04.11.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, AM :- This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld…

Nandkishore Telefilms & Media Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Circle 7(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2563/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…not as per law because the said statement was retracted by him and therefore the reliance on retracted statement was against the settled principle of law.Ld. AR placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. (1956) 30 ITR 181 (SC) wherein it was held that once a statement on oath is retracted, AO has to examine that person again, if that is not done, he cannot rely on original statements made the that person. ii) With respect to refusal of cross examination of the main witness Mr. Vipul Bhatt on whosestatement's basis addition was made, Ld. AR relied on various decisio…

Msl Fish Traders Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2, Bhubaneswar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 333/CTK/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Dec 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.332 & 333/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Msl Fish Traders Private Limited, Vs Dcit, Central Circle-2, Rooom No.14, Fish Market, Unit-4, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan No. : Aajcm 1080 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri D.Parida, Ca & Shri Chitrasen Parida, Adv राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Ld Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 3 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 3 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 31.3.2025 Passed By Ld Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-2 In Appeal No.Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-2/11252/2017-18 For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19, Respectively. 2. Shri D.Parida & Shri Chitrasen Parida, Ld Ars Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By Ld Ar That The Assessee Has Filed Written Submission, Which Reads As Follows:

For Appellant: Shri D.Parida, CA and Shri ChitrasenFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld CIT
Section 132Section 153ASection 246ASection 250Section 69

…of the seized documents and ignore the other parts. The assessee relies on the similar issue adjudicated by The Honourable Supreme Court and High Court in the following judgements: The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mehta Parikh & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax 30 ITR 181 (SC) has held as such; "The High Court recognised this position in effect but went wrong in applying the true principles of interference with such findings of fact to the present case. The attempt which was made by the High Court to probe into the mind of the Tribunal by trying to discard the affidavit of Govindprasad Ramjivan Nivetia in regard to…

Msl Fish Traders Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2, Bhubaneswar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 332/CTK/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.332 & 333/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Msl Fish Traders Private Limited, Vs Dcit, Central Circle-2, Rooom No.14, Fish Market, Unit-4, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan No. : Aajcm 1080 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri D.Parida, Ca & Shri Chitrasen Parida, Adv राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Ld Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 3 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 3 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 31.3.2025 Passed By Ld Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-2 In Appeal No.Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-2/11252/2017-18 For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19, Respectively. 2. Shri D.Parida & Shri Chitrasen Parida, Ld Ars Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By Ld Ar That The Assessee Has Filed Written Submission, Which Reads As Follows:

For Appellant: Shri D.Parida, CA and Shri ChitrasenFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld CIT
Section 132Section 153ASection 246ASection 250Section 69

…of the seized documents and ignore the other parts. The assessee relies on the similar issue adjudicated by The Honourable Supreme Court and High Court in the following judgements: The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mehta Parikh & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax 30 ITR 181 (SC) has held as such; "The High Court recognised this position in effect but went wrong in applying the true principles of interference with such findings of fact to the present case. The attempt which was made by the High Court to probe into the mind of the Tribunal by trying to discard the affidavit of Govindprasad Ramjivan Nivetia in regard to…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi vs. M/S Potdar Brothers, Belagavi

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 180/PAN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 133ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(2)

…Act before first appellate authority which was allowed vide para 4.9 to 4.12 which reads as under; ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 16 M/s Potdar Brothers ITA Nos.175 to 177 & 179 to 180/PAN/2025 4.9 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. Vs CIT 30 ITR 181 held as under; “ITA No.1375 to 1378/Bang/2016 "In the instant case a mere calculation of the nature indulged in by the ITO or the AAC was not enough, without any further scrutiny, to dislodge the position taken up by the assessee, supported as it was, by the entries in the cash book and the affidavits put in by the assessee before the AAC” Thus,…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi vs. M/S Potdar Brothers, Belagavi

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 179/PAN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 133ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(2)

…Act before first appellate authority which was allowed vide para 4.9 to 4.12 which reads as under; ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 16 M/s Potdar Brothers ITA Nos.175 to 177 & 179 to 180/PAN/2025 4.9 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. Vs CIT 30 ITR 181 held as under; “ITA No.1375 to 1378/Bang/2016 "In the instant case a mere calculation of the nature indulged in by the ITO or the AAC was not enough, without any further scrutiny, to dislodge the position taken up by the assessee, supported as it was, by the entries in the cash book and the affidavits put in by the assessee before the AAC” Thus,…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi vs. M/S Potdar Brothers, Belagavi

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 177/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 133ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(2)

…Act before first appellate authority which was allowed vide para 4.9 to 4.12 which reads as under; ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 16 M/s Potdar Brothers ITA Nos.175 to 177 & 179 to 180/PAN/2025 4.9 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. Vs CIT 30 ITR 181 held as under; “ITA No.1375 to 1378/Bang/2016 "In the instant case a mere calculation of the nature indulged in by the ITO or the AAC was not enough, without any further scrutiny, to dislodge the position taken up by the assessee, supported as it was, by the entries in the cash book and the affidavits put in by the assessee before the AAC” Thus,…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi vs. M/S Potdar Brothers, Belagavi

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 176/PAN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 133ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(2)

…Act before first appellate authority which was allowed vide para 4.9 to 4.12 which reads as under; ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 16 M/s Potdar Brothers ITA Nos.175 to 177 & 179 to 180/PAN/2025 4.9 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. Vs CIT 30 ITR 181 held as under; “ITA No.1375 to 1378/Bang/2016 "In the instant case a mere calculation of the nature indulged in by the ITO or the AAC was not enough, without any further scrutiny, to dislodge the position taken up by the assessee, supported as it was, by the entries in the cash book and the affidavits put in by the assessee before the AAC” Thus,…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi vs. M/S Potdar Brothers, Belagavi

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 175/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 133ASection 138Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253(2)

…Act before first appellate authority which was allowed vide para 4.9 to 4.12 which reads as under; ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 16 M/s Potdar Brothers ITA Nos.175 to 177 & 179 to 180/PAN/2025 4.9 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. Vs CIT 30 ITR 181 held as under; “ITA No.1375 to 1378/Bang/2016 "In the instant case a mere calculation of the nature indulged in by the ITO or the AAC was not enough, without any further scrutiny, to dislodge the position taken up by the assessee, supported as it was, by the entries in the cash book and the affidavits put in by the assessee before the AAC” Thus,…

S R Constructions, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

ITA 637/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar,CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 40A

…davits, He could have summoned these sub-contractors as well. ITA Nos.636, 637/Bang/2025 ITA Nos.768, 769/Bang/2025 Page 46 of 60 Therefore, we apply the ratio of the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mehta Parikh and Co. Vs. CIT reported in 30 ITR 181 (SC) to hold that the evidence by way of Affidavit of sub-contractors cannot be doubted if the same has not been controverted by cogent material. 27. We find that the Assessee after calculating adjusted annual turnover by excluding fixed margin back to back contracts, had offered additional income of Rs.5,57,76,684/- and Rs. 6,78,05,419/- for the…

S R Constructions, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

ITA 636/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

Section 40A

…davits. If the ld. CIT(A) had any doubts on the contents of the Affidavits, He could have summoned these sub-contractors as well. Therefore, we apply the ratio of the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mehta Parikh and Co. Vs. CIT reported in 30 ITR 181 (SC) to hold that the evidence by way of Affidavit of sub-contractors cannot be doubted if the same has not been controverted by cogent material. 27. We find that the Assessee after calculating adjusted annual turnover by excluding fixed margin back to back contracts, had offered additional income of Rs.5,57,76,684/- and Rs.6,78,05,419/- for the…

Vijit Singh, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 3(2) Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1246/JPR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Nov 2025AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT
Section 147Section 234ASection 250

…gal position that in the cases where affidavit has been filed yet the contents thereof have not been rebutted by the AO/authority, the facts mentioned therein have to be read as the facts binding upon the Income Tax authorities. Kindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC), ITO v. Dr.TejgopalBhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp)Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s LunardDimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd_239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could not be treated as of a lesser importance than the statement given by the credit…

Aabid Ali Khan, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle 26, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1714/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year : 2017-18 Aabid Ali Khan, Vs. Acit, 2016, First Floor, Cc-26, Bank Street, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 005. Pan: Agqpk0737J

For Appellant: Shri Sanjesh Jarwani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 69A

…provides prima facie evidence regarding the identity and source, the burden shifts to the Department to verify, 5 Likewise, the affidavits filed could not have been brushed aside without cross- examination, in view of the ratio in Mehta Parikh & Co. vs. CIT (30 ITR 181, SC). 3.2 Further, the addition of Rs.11,95,100/- over and above the amount actually seized by the Police is arbitrary and beyond jurisdiction. Most importantly, the entire conclusion of the AO rests on suspicion and conjecture rather than evidence, which is impermissible in law as held in Umacharan Shaw & Bros. vs. CIT (37 ITR 271, SC). Having f…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(3), Bengaluru vs. Mohammed Farooq Kanana, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1509/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2020-21 Ito, Vs. Mr. Mohammed Farooq Kanana, 6 9Th Cross, H Siddaiah Road, Ward – 7(2)(3), Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 027, Karnataka. Pan : Abvpm 1212 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Thirumala Naidu, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Thirumala Naidu, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 147Section 250

…ractors to justify the sales shown in the financial statement. However, the AO has not done any further enquiry and accepted the affidavits and he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Mehta Parikh and Co., Vs. CIT reported in 1956) 30 ITR 181 (SC). 12. Considering the rival submissions, we noted that here the dispute is regarding excess turnover shown by the assessee from the sale of mango products from 24 acres (approx.) of land. However, during the course of assessment proceedings, assessee had filed affidavits from 4 contractors who entered into contract with the assessee at the fl…

Kailash Chand Meena, Alwar vs. ITO Ward2(3), Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 101/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT a
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

…gal position that in the cases where affidavit has been filed yet the contents thereof have not been rebutted by the AO/authority, the facts mentioned therein have to be read as the facts binding upon the Income Tax authorities. Kindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC), ITO v. Dr. TejgopalBhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp) Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s Lunard Dimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd 239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could not be treated as of a lesser importance than the statement given by the cre…

Kashi Nath Seth Sarraf Private Limited, Hardoi vs. ACIT, Sitapur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 88/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 44Section 68

…I.T.A. No.88/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH 'B', LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.88/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2017-18 Kashi Nath Seth Sarraf Private Vs. ACIT, Limited, Sitapur. C/o Sanjay Saxena, 12, Pratap Enclave, Bisrat G. T. Road, Shahjahanpur. PAN:AACCK3717F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Akshay Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by Shri Neeraj Kumar, CIT (D.R.) ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:Α.Μ. (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.88/Lkw/2024 has been filed by t…

Om Prakash Gupta, Sawai Madhopur vs. DCIT Central Circle -1, Jaipur

ITA 401/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR &
Section 115BSection 153ASection 69

…with affidavit dated 24.1.2019 was furnished on behalf of Sh. Ram Singh Meena before the ADIT (Inv.), Kota in which it had been claimed that he was also challenged the legal sanctity of that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. reported in 30 ITR 181 has held that “an un-controverted affidavit should be accepted as such’. Similarly, Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Glass Line Equipment 253 ITR 454 has held that when affidavit was not controverted, it has to be taken as accepted. It is therefore submitted that no credence can be given to statements of Sh. Ram Singh Meena which stood re…

Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal, Sikar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 500/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…e money that has been taken by him from the 106 ITA Nos. 493. 495 to 498/JP/2025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal assessee [ page 159 of the paper book filed]. Thus, respectfully following the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. Vs. CIT [ 30 ITR 181 (SC) ] wherein the Apex Court held that the affidavits and the entries as made in the account books not having been controverted, [ here in the case entries confirmed in the affidavit ] the department could not challenge its nature the other content mentioned in that affidavit of having not been paid the interest to the assessee cannot be disput…